Like, honestly too. The humans running the show are outrageously expensive, cause huge ecological harm, make their decisions based on vibes with no understanding of their domain, and their purposes are inscrutable to the average worker. They’re honestly the perfect target for AI because they already behave like AI.
I don’t think I actually want to live in a world where AI is running the show, but I’m not sure it’d be any worse than the current system of letting the most parasitic bloodsucking class of human being call the shots. Maybe we ought to try something else first.
But make sure to tell the board of directors and shareholders how much more profitable they’d be if they didn’t have to buy golden parachutes
I would say CEOs, but you said talent. So I guess “none” is my answer.
CEO is usually my answer as well when people ask
Like, honestly too. The humans running the show are outrageously expensive, cause huge ecological harm, make their decisions based on vibes with no understanding of their domain, and their purposes are inscrutable to the average worker. They’re honestly the perfect target for AI because they already behave like AI.
I don’t think I actually want to live in a world where AI is running the show, but I’m not sure it’d be any worse than the current system of letting the most parasitic bloodsucking class of human being call the shots. Maybe we ought to try something else first.
But make sure to tell the board of directors and shareholders how much more profitable they’d be if they didn’t have to buy golden parachutes
I’d say that you could replace quite a few high level academic administrators for these same reasons.
They already behave like AI; but AI would be cheaper, more efficient, and wouldn’t change every 2 years.
And I mean that as an insult to admin, not a compliment to AI.
just edited question to job instead